Washington Post cops reporter writes about own crack habit

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

Interesting. I wonder how often cops reporters get lure into the vices of the neighborhoods they cover:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/28/AR2007122801357_pf.html

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Same frequency as the cops do, I'm guessing.

 

[Write-brained]

I'll have to read this later. But Good Lord. ???

 

[Rumpleforeskin]

Better him than the high school volleyball reporter. :o

 

[Songbird]

One of these years I'll write about my dark nights in Roswell. I know EXACTLY what this story is all about. The thrill of it all outweighed any consequences I may have suffered by infinity. Well, the thrill ... and the fact I was an addict.

Two days before I left Roswell, I hawked a really nice Canon 35-mm camera and my DVD player (combined, probably worth $500) for $55 so I could feed the beast. I don't regret it because you can't regret the things you loved in the past.

Soon as I saw the part of the guy grabbing a gun, my mind jerked me back to the night I was in Chiahuita and the same thing happened, for the most part but with a few different circumstances, at 3:30 in the a.m.

I'll finish the rest of the story later. I'm intrigued.

 

[JayFarrar]

The story is quite the read ... I think I want to hear more of Xan's story.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

A bit of exhibitionism in doing a story like this, I think. Does the paper think this recovery story is more interesting than other recovery stories because it belongs to a reporter instead of, say, a janitor or a nurse or a district attorney or a cab driver? And what's new about this particular one? What insights does it bring that can't be read elsewhere? A traditional, multisource story about recovery from alcoholism or addiction, I can see running those from time to time.

 

[Ace]

It's a good story. Only beef I had with it is that it is 16 years later.

 

[pallister]

Same frequency as the cops do, I'm guessing.

Probably not quite that high.

 

[Fenian_Bastard]

Same principle, though.

 

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

A bit of exhibitionism in doing a story like this, I think. Does the paper think this recovery story is more interesting than other recovery stories because it belongs to a reporter instead of, say, a janitor or a nurse or a district attorney or a cab driver? And what's new about this particular one? What insights does it bring that can't be read elsewhere? A traditional, multisource story about recovery from alcoholism or addiction, I can see running those from time to time.

I disagree. There's power in first-writing done well. Why do you think so much fiction is written in that voice? Or that memoir is so popular? The fact that the guy was a cops reporter basically sucked into his city's biggest crime problem (I know F_B and others would disagree with that and it's duly noted), and the guy can write, is compelling enough to deserve this treatment.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

A bit of exhibitionism in doing a story like this, I think. Does the paper think this recovery story is more interesting than other recovery stories because it belongs to a reporter instead of, say, a janitor or a nurse or a district attorney or a cab driver? And what's new about this particular one? What insights does it bring that can't be read elsewhere? A traditional, multisource story about recovery from alcoholism or addiction, I can see running those from time to time.

I disagree. There's power in first-writing done well. Why do you think so much fiction is written in that voice? Or that memoir is so popular? The fact that the guy was a cops reporter basically sucked into his city's biggest crime problem (I know F_B and others would disagree with that and it's duly noted), and the guy can write, is compelling enough to deserve this treatment.

You can disagree, fine. I am less concerned with the "power" of the writing -- the WP has a talented staff that produces no shortage of good writing every day -- than I am with the appropriateness of essentially saying to readers that of the thousands and thousands of people successfully recovering from substance-abuse problems in the D.C. area, this one is most worthy of news hole because it involves a journalist.

Also, if I were that guy's editor, I would have said: "That 12-step group you mention? The one that gave you the help you sought when you needed it? (Alcoholics, Narcotics, Cocaine) Anonymous? Isn't the anonymity thing because they don't want people appointing themselves as spokespeople for organizations that are run by consensus? Do you wish to come off the same as some celebrity who takes a limo from Betty Ford to Larry King? And sometimes winds up back at Betty Ford a year later?"

Again, exhibitionism. I am not saying the dude ought to be shunned like a plagiarist. I just find it unseemly on a couple levels. You don't have to agree with me.

 

[PackOfGauchos]

Enough of your habitual over-analysis, Frank. It's a great damn story. Period.

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Enough of your habitual over-analysis, Frank. It's a great damn story. Period.

Period? OK. If you say so.

 

[Norman Stansfield]

Enough of your habitual over-analysis, Frank. It's a great damn story. Period.

Says the guy with 51 posts.

 

[FileNotFound]

Enough of your habitual over-analysis, Frank. It's a great damn story. Period.

Says the guy with 51 posts.

So?

 

[JC]

Frank don't you think there is more significance since he was reporting about a drug world he was a part of?

 

[Frank_Ridgeway]

Frank don't you think there is more significance since he was reporting about a drug world he was a part of?

No. It's been done before anyway. Some LAT sports guy wrote about his pill addiction in the 1980s. There is nothing about a substance-abuse problem that is at all unique.

And in this month's GQ we have a first-person account of a sperm donor. Which wasn't so bad since he did some actual reporting instead of just babbling about getting paid to beat off once a week for a year. (Sorry, no link.)

 

[fishwrapper]

I think there are great points and questions all around here. Why are one's more valid than an other?
This is a discussion board. We're supposed to question. Hell, it's at the core of our mission.

There is a hint of exhibitionism found in a piece like this. By nature. Frank's concern is that such a motive strikes a reader. And he's right. The L.A. Times did one earlier this year with a photographer and his Pulitzer subject. It was widely acclaimed but seemed a bit of auto-fellatio. The question is, does the story outweigh the possible consequence(s).

Ace, brings up another interesting debate. The time element. 16 years. Seems long. 16 months would have been not enough. They taught us about "the hook." Other than circumstance, there isn't one.

 

[Pulitzer Wannabe]

People hate the media. They think we're judgmental and "elite." Don't you think that this might have the opposite effect of what Frank is saying - not, "My drug problem is more important than yours," but, "Hey, I work at the Washington Post and I'm still just as vulnerable to your neighborhood's scourge. We're in this together."